Revision as of 18:24, 27 April 2011 editMiszaBot III (talk | contribs)597,462 editsm Archiving 2 thread(s) (older than 30d) to User talk:The-Pope/Archive 6.← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:13, 29 April 2011 edit undoFoxhound66 (talk | contribs)2,693 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
Line 92: | Line 92: | ||
I guess as long as it's someone who likes Cricket in Victoria, and they don't pass themselves off as the organisation, it's fine. And on a related note, Google "Sydney Thunder" and see what gets the most hits (no, I'm not talking about the boat-ride company).<br /> | I guess as long as it's someone who likes Cricket in Victoria, and they don't pass themselves off as the organisation, it's fine. And on a related note, Google "Sydney Thunder" and see what gets the most hits (no, I'm not talking about the boat-ride company).<br /> | ||
--] (]) 09:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC) | --] (]) 09:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC) | ||
==]== | |||
I will not gie up on nominating the article for deletion. You may be an adminstrator and love the fact that the "community" agrees or keeping this non-notable person there, but you aren't a know it all person either. That's all i will say. PS: don't reply on my talk page. and besides, you comment is so condescending.] (]) 20:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:13, 29 April 2011
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Nomination of Phindiwe Sangweni for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Phindiwe Sangweni is suitable for inclusion in Misplaced Pages according to Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Phindiwe Sangweni until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
Hi, I noticed you made an edit to the above page. Just thought you may like to know. Cheers, GetDownAdam (talk) 03:02, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Denyse
Sorry, edit conflicted some sources on your PROD. No worries here, have a great week! --joe decker 15:49, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Michael Willson
Hi, why not just edit Michael Willson back to a redirect? No one messed with it for almost five months and he is mentioned in Gladiators (UK TV series), if it becomes a problem we can always semi-protect it. With the BLPprod we are going to have to look at it for ten days. J04n(talk page) 17:45, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry to step in here, but you won't have to look at it for 10 days, I had to decline the BLPPROD because the article's creation predates March 18, 2010. *makes a funny face at our policy rulebook* I added two sources and tagged for notability, but I wouldn't contest putting the redirect back, or sending this to AfD, either. I thought I was going to send it to AfD myself, but with the sources I'm entirely neutral. --joe decker 18:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- As I said on the talk page, I consider the article creation date to be yesterday, as yesterday was the date that the unreferenced content was added, not the date that it was first made. Apart from that, I have no problem with any of your actions.The-Pope (talk) 22:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- I blew that, totally missed your talk page note. I'll take the idea you present and give it some thought, but I do apologize for not poked at the Talk page. --joe decker 23:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- I was being a bit y, but it probably is something we should explore/discuss and define at the BLPPROD page. Like I said above, your actions were absolutely appropriate and no need to apologise.The-Pope (talk) 23:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! Cheers, --joe decker 00:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- The whole point of only making the BLPprod for the new articles was to prevent the mass deletions. As we get the backlog down now to a workable number it will have to be revisited and it will make sense to apply it all BLPs. J04n(talk page) 02:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks! Cheers, --joe decker 00:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
- I was being a bit y, but it probably is something we should explore/discuss and define at the BLPPROD page. Like I said above, your actions were absolutely appropriate and no need to apologise.The-Pope (talk) 23:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- I blew that, totally missed your talk page note. I'll take the idea you present and give it some thought, but I do apologize for not poked at the Talk page. --joe decker 23:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
- As I said on the talk page, I consider the article creation date to be yesterday, as yesterday was the date that the unreferenced content was added, not the date that it was first made. Apart from that, I have no problem with any of your actions.The-Pope (talk) 22:43, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Contributor copyright investigations#Ktr101
Hi The-Pope. You warned Ktr101 (talk · contribs) for his close paraphrasing and copyright violations at John T. Olson. I've started a CCI for the user at Misplaced Pages:Contributor copyright investigations#Ktr101 due to his extensive history of copyright violations. If you have more evidence to add, feel free to do so. Cunard (talk) 06:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
DYK for Jayden Pitt
On 9 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jayden Pitt, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Jayden Pitt, the lightest player on the Fremantle Football Club playing list at only 70 kg (150 lb), was a surprise selection when he made his début in the opening round of the 2011 AFL season? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Courtyard Cricket
One may recall the speedy deletion of Courtyard Cricket. If shorter pages, such as Street cricket with less references, less external links, less See Also links and less pages linking to it than Courtyard Cricket, one must ask why Courtyard Cricket is an unacceptable page. Apparently it does not comply with Misplaced Pages guidelines? If so, fair enough, but further clarification may be required so that users of Misplaced Pages can make the appropriate changes. Courtyard Cricket is a legitimate sport in Tasmania. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gravybabytrain (talk • contribs) 03:47, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
- Please read WP:MADEUP, WP:V and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Referred to WT:CRIC for a third opinion. The-Pope (talk) 04:19, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
AfD
Bit stiff with this this close. Though it was going to be "no consensus" personally. Jenks24 (talk) 09:49, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
- Meh, in future, I think we have enough consensus/precedents to just redirect to the list of players article, and bypass AfD altogether.The-Pope (talk) 10:53, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Ben Stratton
Hi, I'm here regarding my PROD on the article Ben Stratton. Although he has played an AFL game, I believe Ben is not notable enough to guarantee a Misplaced Pages biography. According to my research, there are no info on his childhood and personal life, and he's only been in the system for exactly one year, Round 3 2010 – Round 3 2011. Do you think the article can get pass the current "Stub" status? Alright you can say that he's still new to the system and that he's got probably 8 years to go (haven't thought of that yet). Anyway, if that's the case, we'll have to wait a few years before we can get a reasonable article. I'm taking my PROD back. Sp33dyphil 01:08, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Unreferenced BLPs
I've just logged in for the first time in two months. Thank you for your advice (8 February) about the current standards for referencing BLP's. I'll observe those standards from now on. David Cannon (talk) 02:17, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Computer scientists are archers now?
Hi there, I assume you're the man to talk to about Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/UBLPs by sport. If you look at the Archery section you may notice that there aren't actually any archers in it, only computer scientists and economists! Anyway, it's not a big deal or anything, but I thought you might like to know (and possibly be able to fix it). Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 22:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
- I noticed it a while ago - because there isn't a WP:ARCHERY, we need to use the categories, and the DASHBot system can't do a recursive search down a category tree, so you need to use a wildcard search in the category name. Unfortunately *archers* also picks up *researchers*, so you get some false positives. I'm not sure how many other people are using those lists... not many from what I've tracked - I think most either use the random button, the WP:URBLPR by month approach or do their own catscans. The-Pope (talk) 07:21, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Ah ok then. Yeah, it's not a real problem, I was just a bit confused by it. Anyway, thanks for explaining and, yeah, I don't think a whole lot of people use that list anyway (that said, I find the sports one fairly useful). Cheers, Jenks24 (talk) 13:23, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Western Front
If it's 9/10 years, isn't this the show that started in 2002 with Dennis Cometti when he went to STW9 from TVW7? I can't remember the name of that show but it was at that time a brand new WA-produced footy show with a mixture of the two WA teams plus the WAFL and a lot of "golden greats" type stuff. Orderinchaos 23:00, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, it appears the WF show was a product of the same deal, but not the same show. When Nine and Ten won the rights off Seven for the AFL, locally, Dennis Cometti switched to STW9. Nine pitched a new show, "Cometti Live" (a personal project of Cometti's which he'd had the idea of for some years), to take advantage of this. (A lengthy interview of Cometti is in Lawrence, David (23 March 2002). "The emperor's new show". The West Australian.) It first aired at 10:10pm on Monday 25 March 2002 and had a talkback format. Then Ten started "The Western Front", hosted by Tim Gossage, at 4:30pm on Saturday 30 March 2002 as a "light, bright magazine show". Quote from article: "It will be totally WA, with presenters Lachy Reid, Tania Armstrong and Clint Wheeldon, as well as Gossage, and is to focus on The Eagles and Dockers and the WAFL." (Newton, Allen (24 March 2002). "Live derby for WA". The Sunday Times.) Cometti Live only appears to have lasted for one season, it was canned in favour of a footy panel which, as far as I can tell, never eventuated. (Yeap, Sue (4 February 2003). "No fears for Nine". The Sunday Times.) On 30 November 2003, it was announced that Daniel Chick would be signed to Ten and his commitments would include work for the Western Front, and the article noted Paul Hasleby was already there. (Article is called "News coup", Sunday Times, p.2, same date.) Yay for Factiva. Orderinchaos 23:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
- Cometti Live was a later night show, WF was always a filler on Sat arvo. Wish I had Factiva access! There was an inside cover story a few weeks ago about the "Western Front Curse", in that almost ever player that they've signed up has had a serious injury - normally a knee. Might be worth a mention if I can find the old paper - I think it was a few days after LeCras got injured. If you could find a source for the "only non-news Ten show filmed in Perth" I'd be very happy. The-Pope (talk) 01:50, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Hello, The-Pope. You have new messages at Loukinho's talk page.Message added 01:05, 22 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
User talk:Cricketvictoria - you beat me to it
Ave!
I guess as long as it's someone who likes Cricket in Victoria, and they don't pass themselves off as the organisation, it's fine. And on a related note, Google "Sydney Thunder" and see what gets the most hits (no, I'm not talking about the boat-ride company).
--Shirt58 (talk) 09:46, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Daniel Street
I will not gie up on nominating the article for deletion. You may be an adminstrator and love the fact that the "community" agrees or keeping this non-notable person there, but you aren't a know it all person either. That's all i will say. PS: don't reply on my talk page. and besides, you comment is so condescending.Other dictionaries are better (talk) 20:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)